Talk:Metropolitan Examiner
I don't think I'm quite comfortable with the descriptions of the real-world newspapers section. Perhaps a review of them using some of the Wikipedia information available might be in order?--Kodia 13:59, 20 August 2008 (UTC) Perhaps so. Do you want to tackle it? (The essence of wiki....) — Greer Watson 17:09, 20 August 2008 (UTC) :Sure, but I wanted to make sure this wasn't in that category of "placeholders I have to get out of my head before I scream but which I plan to update sooner or later." :) --Kodia 20:26, 20 August 2008 (UTC) ::Nah, it's just a placeholder I don't care if someone else expands for me. Keep the stuff about once not having Sunday papers at all, though. I gather there are places that don't have the big Saturday editions that are the norm in Canada. — Greer Watson 23:55, 20 August 2008 (UTC) The biggest problems I was having with this page involved the graphics and the duplicated episode list. I ended lining up the pictures of the headlines in one row because I kept trying to compare them side-by-side and I couldn't do that with the pictures scattered within the text. I also removed the list of episodes in favor of the bulleted list that provides the same information and includes descriptions of each. Once I had that figured out, I could focus on the editorial stance of the real-world newspapers, which I placed at the end of the article because ultimately this wiki is about FK, not Toronto. The editorial positions and main readership lists are taken from the Wikipedia entry on Toronto.--Kodia 02:17, 21 August 2008 (UTC) This is fine except for the pictures. Putting them all in one row runs them waaaaaaaay off the side of the page for me. We need to have them in two rows so they'll fit on the page. As it is, I only see two of them in their entirety; and the fourth is completely off screen without scrolling over. — Greer Watson 03:15, 21 August 2008 (UTC) :Fooey. And I even tested it on two different monitors, using three different browsers. Poop.--Kodia 03:19, 21 August 2008 (UTC) :Does resizing the pictures a little smaller and removing the bulk of the caption text make any difference on your horizontal scroll?--Kodia 03:45, 21 August 2008 (UTC) ::The short answer to that is no. All it means is that I now see about two-thirds of the third picture (instead of about one third). The fourth one is still completely off screen. Two rows is the only way to go. It would have the double advantage that you could put the captions back on and make the pictures a bit bigger. — Greer Watson 03:58, 21 August 2008 (UTC) Well the two rows doesn't appeal at all to my sense of design on the page. I'll make it look more like the page on taxis and we'll leave it at that for consistency's sake.--Kodia 04:14, 21 August 2008 (UTC) :It does mean that you can't do a side-by-side comparison; but I guess one can't have everything. The more so since a really good side-by-side would need pictures that were a lot larger. :Apropos of which, I may go back at some time and add in a bit of info about the smaller headlines on the page, just to fatten things up a bit. It's marvellous what is visible on some of the screen captures when you look at them at a really large size. (It's how one can sometimes crop out a detail, and still thumbnail it to a decent picture.) Unfortunately, it simply isn't feasible to show really large shots on a wiki. Quite unfair to the poor viewer, who has to download the thing. :Anyway, this looks good. — Greer Watson 04:56, 21 August 2008 (UTC)